Cleon
King of the Pod People
"Ukraine" or "The Ukraine"?
- Thread starter RSLancastr
- Start date
-
- Tags
- language issues
RSLancastr
www.StopSylvia.com
Rat
Not bored. Never bored.,
Oh I know, and I think they've got a bloody cheek.
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
Well most countries use "Republic of Macedonia" now.
Aaaaaarrgghh. You've just brought back some bloody awful memories from an IT project a few years ago.
I prefer 'squiggle'.
commandlinegamer
Philosopher
To wit:
Listening to the album as I type this: still sounds pretty good given I haven't played it in maybe 15 years or more.
I was also trying to think of other examples: one that springs to mind is Yemen/The Yemen.
Last edited:
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
I believe The Gambia is still The Gambia.
Morrigan
Crone of War
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2006
- Messages
- 8,262
That reminds me of Congo. I thought it was just "Congo" but I heard Jon Stewart recently mention "the Congo", which puzzled me. In fact, other than "the US" and "the UK" (and formerly "the USSR") I can't think of any country where it sounds better (in English) to add a "the" article in front of it... "the Gambia", really? 
Last edited:
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
Rat
Not bored. Never bored.,
But both the Congo and the Gambia are rivers.
Cleon
King of the Pod People
commandlinegamer said:
That doesn't make much sense. As I said upthread, the Russian language has no definite article - there's no equivalent of "the." So how would a tsar employ such a "linguistic ploy?"
commandlinegamer
Philosopher
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
That reminds me of Congo. I thought it was just "Congo" but I heard Jon Stewart recently mention "the Congo", which puzzled me. In fact, other than "the US" and "the UK" (and formerly "the USSR") I can't think of any country where it sounds better (in English) to add a "the" article in front of it... "the Gambia", really?
The Netherlands?
commandlinegamer
Philosopher
That doesn't make much sense. As I said upthread, the Russian language has no definite article - there's no equivalent of "the." So how would a tsar employ such a "linguistic ploy?"
I don't know any more than that; I'm quoting from a 25-year-old album's sleevenotes which don't give any more detail sadly.
Possibly because the language of the Russian Court at the time was French.That doesn't make much sense. As I said upthread, the Russian language has no definite article - there's no equivalent of "the." So how would a tsar employ such a "linguistic ploy?"
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2001
- Messages
- 53,097
Is The The still The The?
angrysoba
Philosophile
Why not?
Doesn't Czech have no articles? In which case, would there be no difference in Czech?
Maybe Czecho would be better...
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
Because in the term "The Czech Republic", the word "Czech" is an adjective, not a noun. It is qualifying the noun "Republic".
It's the same construction as "The Roman Empire" or (more topically, if the BBC is to be viewed...) "The Austro-Hungarian Empire". In both of those examples, you cannot simply take the adjective and use it as a stand-alone noun. You have to say "Austria-Hungary", and in fact there's no real fully-accurate stand-alone noun to represent "The Roman Empire", since "Rome" is usually a uselessly-ambiguous shorthand.
We're stuck, therefore, with "The Czech Republic", until and unless we bring into accepted usage the alternative noun of Czechia (which would be the accompanying noun to the adjective "Czech").
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
BTW, on the original "The.... " question, my feeling is that it's got quite a lot to do with patrician colonial attitudes among the sorts of people who used to discuss foreign climes the most: diplomats, civil servants, politicians and foreign media correspondents.
My instinct is that the use of the "The... " construction was/is done - whether consciously or subconsciously - to subtly imply a form of superiority over "lesser" nations and cultures. Outside of the courtly states of Europe, most of the rest of the world was (in the eyes of these sorts of people, right into the middle of the 20th century), inhabited by peoples who ranged from simply inferior (in terms of education, culture, manners and so on) to savages. I think that part of this - as some have alluded to before - was to (again subtly) separate the geographical region from its inhabitants/culture/economy (since these latter elemets were considered secondary).
Thus one talked of going to "The Argentine" (to steal its silver, probably...), and by using that term one was (again, whether consciously or not) excluding the more esoteric aspects of that area - its people, its culture etc. Indeed, one would need to refer to "The people of the Argentine" in order to refer to the inhabitants - the term "Argentinian" automatically implies citizens of a nation state (with all the attendant connotations of sovereignty, autonomy, etc).
I wouldn't mind betting that a sociologist or social historian somewhere has done some academic work on this subject. In a spare few hours, I might try to have a look around. But I truly do think that there are deeper, sociological reasons why the "The... " construction was so common in reference to further-flung regions of the world.
My instinct is that the use of the "The... " construction was/is done - whether consciously or subconsciously - to subtly imply a form of superiority over "lesser" nations and cultures. Outside of the courtly states of Europe, most of the rest of the world was (in the eyes of these sorts of people, right into the middle of the 20th century), inhabited by peoples who ranged from simply inferior (in terms of education, culture, manners and so on) to savages. I think that part of this - as some have alluded to before - was to (again subtly) separate the geographical region from its inhabitants/culture/economy (since these latter elemets were considered secondary).
Thus one talked of going to "The Argentine" (to steal its silver, probably...), and by using that term one was (again, whether consciously or not) excluding the more esoteric aspects of that area - its people, its culture etc. Indeed, one would need to refer to "The people of the Argentine" in order to refer to the inhabitants - the term "Argentinian" automatically implies citizens of a nation state (with all the attendant connotations of sovereignty, autonomy, etc).
I wouldn't mind betting that a sociologist or social historian somewhere has done some academic work on this subject. In a spare few hours, I might try to have a look around. But I truly do think that there are deeper, sociological reasons why the "The... " construction was so common in reference to further-flung regions of the world.
Rat
Not bored. Never bored.,
In terms of demonyms, I can see that being true (as in 'the Americans' and so on), but I don't really see it in terms of place names, and certainly not countries. We have never had 'the India'; we had the Indies, of course, but that's a simple plural like the Solomon Islands. We never had the Kenya, or the Guinea, or anything similar. I can't really see a pattern where we used 'the' for what we saw as colonies of savages.
In terms of demonyms, we still refer to the French, for example, so it doesn't follow that we use it to refer to our inferiors.
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
Last edited: